A few weeks ago, in a post about the soon-to-be-launched AnnArbor.com site, I suggested that perhaps Tony Dearing, their Director of Content, was a bit naïve when he said publicly that they would be able to control the conversation taking place in the comments section by employing “aggressive moderation.” Well, it looks like Dearing has responded on the A2.com placeholder site. Here’s some of what he had to say:
…Our Web advisory panel met for the first time this morning in a community room at the Ann Arbor Public Library to see how our site is developing so far, to ask questions and give us input. We listed the names of our advisory group in an earlier post.
They urged us to take a strong hand in moderating conversation on AnnArbor.com right from launch. One warned us that the failure to do so could allow our site to degenerate into a “wretched hive of scum and villainy.”
To avoid that, we should have norms for conversation on the site, clearly enforce those norms, and be transparent about what we’re doing.
That’s interesting, because I talked about our plan to moderate “aggressively” in an earlier post, and that intention was immediately challenged by blogger Mark Maynard. In the spirit of viewer discretion, I should mention that if you follow the link to Maynard’s blog, the comment thread includes an impressive array of vulgarities. Even Maynard was moved to joke that “On second thought, maybe aggressive moderation is a good thing”…
Before I go any further, I’d like to reiterate that I want AnnArbor.com to be wildly successful. I think that our region needs serious journalism, and I hope, with the loss of the Ann Arbor News, this new entity, AnnArbor.com, might step into the void and fill that role. (Blogs aren’t journalism, and shouldn’t be seen as such.) My only point in that initial post was to suggest that cultivating a healthy and active online community isn’t as easy as Dearing makes it sound… If you want to foster a real community dialogue, in my opinion, people have to know that they’re being heard, and that, it seems to me, runs counter to aggressive moderation.
In my first post on the matter, I gave two examples. In one case I wondered what they would do in the eventuality that someone left a valid but unfavorable comment about an advertiser. In the other case, I was wondering how they would react when things got heated around a specific, divisive topic, like Israel, or abortion. My point was that, like it or not, they’re going to have to confront some difficult issues. And, yes, I stated that Dearing was naive when he said that he was convinced that they could pull it off with relative ease because he’d talked with someone who had run an online community in the past. Believe it or not, I was trying to be helpful by pointing out that “aggressive moderation,” while it sounds good, isn’t going to be all that easy. (I suggested that they open things up completely and let the chips fall where they may. The community, I suggested, would regulate itself.)
But I suspect they’ll find that out in good time.
Anyway, I just thought that it was funny that they implied that this site of mine – which has run for about 7 years now, gets up to 1,000 individual readers a day, and has only had to erase 3 comments in all that time – by leaving its comments section open, and free of aggressive moderation, is “a wretched hive of scum and villainy.”
Needless to say, I disagree. I think that we talk about real issues here, and, more importantly, I think we work together to arrive at real, practical solutions. I think that a lot of good has come from this site, and I think a major reason for that is the open posting policy. Within reason, people know that when they post a comment here, that it’ll go up on the site, people will see it, and, in some cases, it will influence the course of the dialogue. Sure, I’ve got a bar, but it’s set incredibly low. And I think that helps more than it hurts. But that’s not why I bring any of this up at the moment. What I have in mind is much more serious… I want to know if any of you would like to take a shot at designing the first official MarkMaynard.com t-shirt. The only rule is that it has to be 3 colors or less and contain the phrase – “a wretched hive of scum and villainy.” You don’t even have to include the name of the site, if you don’t want to. I could print that on the inside.
And, for what it’s worth, I think I need an advisory panel too.